Accountability For Human Rights Violations Research Articles

In the Shadow of Justice: Human Rights Implications of Criminal Acts

This research article delves into the intricate interplay between criminality and human rights violations within legal frameworks. This research scrutinizes how criminal acts, ranging from petty offenses to egregious crimes, cast a pervasive shadow over the landscape of justice and individual liberties. This article illuminates the multifaceted ways criminal behavior intersects with fundamental human rights principles by examining case studies, legislative measures, and international conventions. It explores the challenges posed by balancing the imperatives of law enforcement with the protection of civil liberties, emphasizing the need for nuanced approaches that safeguard human dignity amidst the pursuit of justice. Additionally, the article investigates the role of legal systems in addressing systemic injustices and promoting accountability for human rights violations perpetrated through criminal means. Through a comprehensive analysis, this study seeks to contribute to scholarly discourse on the complex dynamics between criminality, justice, and human rights, ultimately advocating for policies and practices that uphold the rights and dignity of all individuals within the realm of law.

Examining the Role of International Human Rights Tribunals in Promoting Accountability for Human Rights Violations

This study investigates the crucial role of international human rights courts in advancing accountability for human rights abuses. Its primary objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of these tribunals in holding accountable those — individuals, states, and non-state actors are to blame for major human rights violations. As part of the research methodology, relevant literature, case studies, and legal decisions from international human rights tribunals are thoroughly examined. The International Criminal Court (ICC), the International Court of Justice, and local human rights courts are all part of this. The scope of the investigation includes War crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity, torture, and enforced disappearances. The findings underscore the substantial contribution made by international human rights courts in ensuring justice, truth-seeking, and redress for victims of human rights abuses. These tribunals have played a pivotal role in establishing legal precedents, clarifying the extent of human rights obligations, and fostering international cooperation to address impunity. The study also explores the challenges confronted by international human rights courts, including limited jurisdiction, enforcement capacity, and political opposition. Additionally, it examines potential synergies between international tribunals and national justice systems to strengthen accountability mechanisms at both the international and domestic levels. The findings of this study have significant implications for policymakers, individuals who advocate for human rights, and those who work in the legal field because they highlight the importance of a powerful and independent international human rights court in promoting accountability and providing justice for victims of human rights violations all over the world.

The Morocco-Nigeria BIT: An Important contribution to Ensuring the Accountability of TNCs for Their Human Rights Violations?

Corporate accountability for human rights violations has been at the forefront of the business and human rights debate. This debate has focused on the establishment of binding human rights obligations on corporate entities, particularly following the Human rights Council’s initiative to establish a treaty on business and human rights– a mandate given to the open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. Joining this debate, this paper briefly comments on relevant provisions of the 2016 Morocco-Nigeria Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) which appears to contain innovative provisions that seek to ensure that investors (who are often corporate entities) are held accountable for their investment activities that adversely impact human rights within their host States. Although the Morocco-Nigeria BIT remains exceptional within the investment treaty framework, it reflects an initiative to ensure that the next generation of BITs encourages greater corporate accountability for their human rights violations.

The Morocco-Nigeria BIT: An Important Contribution to Ensuring the Accountability of TNCs for their Human Rights Violations?

Corporate accountability for human rights violations has been at the forefront of the business and human rights debate. This debate has focused on the establishment of binding human rights obligations on corporate entities, particularly following the Human rights Council’s initiative to establish a treaty on business and human rights– a mandate given to the open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights. Joining this debate, this paper briefly comments on relevant provisions of the 2016 Morocco-Nigeria Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) which appears to contain innovative provisions that seek to ensure that investors (who are often corporate entities) are held accountable for their investment activities that adversely impact human rights within their host States. Although the Morocco-Nigeria BIT remains exceptional within the investment treaty framework, it reflects an initiative to ensure that the next generation of BITs encourages greater corporate accountability for their human rights violations.

Conflict Dynamics as a Narrative Process: The Evolution of Competing Conflict Narratives between Russia and Ukraine and the Narratives of the International Human Rights Bodies between 2014 and 2022

Drawing on the studies on narrative processes underlying conflict escalation, this article examines the constitution and evolution of conflicting narratives between Russia and Ukraine as expressed in their foreign policy discourse and key political pronouncements between 2014 and 2022. Furthermore, it compares Russia’s and Ukraine’s official narratives with those developed by the international human rights community using the example of the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU) created by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in March 2014. This comparative analysis aims to understand the differences between discursive elements constituting narratives of the parties in conflict and of an international body aiming to achieve accountability for human rights violations as a basis for reconciliation, which could serve as entries for peacebuilding. Finally, the theoretical framework of conflict escalation as a narrative process proposed by Cobb (2013) is used to understand the dynamics of conflict escalation from 2014 to 2022. The mapping and analysis of narratives undertaken in the article show the key issue of contention between Russia and Ukraine during the studied period was the interpretation of the legitimacy of the use of force. The key consequence of the discursive attribution of conflict escalation and violence became the evolving political legitimisation of the use of force fuelling conflict escalation and protraction.

Prosecuting Human Violations Committed in the Anglophone Cameroon Crisis: A Disquisition on the Legal Framework

The prosecution of perpetrators of mass violations of human rights remains one of the unfinished tasks of Africa's ʺdemocraciesʺ which, in itself, is eloquent evidence of the need for systemic arrangements to protect human rights, build a culture of the rule of law and ultimately defeat impunity. Emboldened by the absence of the foregoing, accountability for human rights violations of individuals and the fulfilment of the corresponding duty to prosecute violators have been contentious issues in Africa's politically volatile communities. As states are caught betwixt and between protecting human rights and holding individuals accountable, the questions about the State's fulfilment of its international obligations arises. Sourced primarily from international treaties, customary international law, and general principles of law, the duty to prosecute violations of human rights is revisited with a focus on the theoretical and legal framework. Situated in the context of the ongoing Anglophone Cameroon crisis in which political factions of the English-speaking regions are pitted against the French-speaking dominated Government of Cameroon, and bringing to the fore the violations, which have become an odious scourge, this paper argues that there is a sacrosanct duty on the Government of Cameroon to investigate, prosecute and punish such violations. The paper interrogates the relevant international law instruments and engages in a dialogue with relevant and respectable literature penned by prominent scholars and jurists on the issue of accountability. It provides an analytical disquisition on the duty to prosecute which, as argued herein, must be fulfilled by Cameroon given the violations that have been committed during the ongoing Anglophone Cameroon crisis.

Prosecuting Human Violations Committed in the Anglophone Cameroon Crisis: A Disquisition on the Legal Framework

The prosecution of perpetrators of mass violations of human rights remains one of the unfinished tasks of Africa's ʺdemocraciesʺ which, in itself, is eloquent evidence of the need for systemic arrangements to protect human rights, build a culture of the rule of law and ultimately defeat impunity. Emboldened by the absence of the foregoing, accountability for human rights violations of individuals and the fulfilment of the corresponding duty to prosecute violators have been contentious issues in Africa's politically volatile communities. As states are caught betwixt and between protecting human rights and holding individuals accountable, the questions about the State's fulfilment of its international obligations arises. Sourced primarily from international treaties, customary international law, and general principles of law, the duty to prosecute violations of human rights is revisited with a focus on the theoretical and legal framework. Situated in the context of the ongoing Anglophone Cameroon crisis in which political factions of the English-speaking regions are pitted against the French-speaking dominated Government of Cameroon, and bringing to the fore the violations, which have become an odious scourge, this paper argues that there is a sacrosanct duty on the Government of Cameroon to investigate, prosecute and punish such violations. The paper interrogates the relevant international law instruments and engages in a dialogue with relevant and respectable literature penned by prominent scholars and jurists on the issue of accountability. It provides an analytical disquisition on the duty to prosecute which, as argued herein, must be fulfilled by Cameroon given the violations that have been committed during the ongoing Anglophone Cameroon crisis.

INSON HUQUQLARI UMUMJAHON DEKLARATSIYASIDA INSON HUQUQLARIGA OID AYRIM MASALALAR

This article analyzes norms aimed at protecting human rights set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The civil and personal rights enshrined in the Declaration, as well as economic, social and cultural rights, were discussed in detail on the basis of the Constitution of Uzbekistan. In particular, the right to life, the right to liberty and security of person, the prohibition of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the right to housing, the right to freedom of thought, speech and religion were analyzed. At the same time, this article examines the ongoing reforms in the field of human rights and the existing problems in the protection of human rights. Appropriate proposals and recommendations have been developed to address the problems. In particular, proposals are being put forward regarding strengthening cooperation between government agencies and civil society institutions in the field of human rights, ensuring parliamentary and public control over the implementation of relevant laws, strengthening accountability for human rights violations, expanding the system of human rights training for government officials directly responsible for human rights and to setting up a system of training them.

Putting the French Duty of Vigilance Law in Context: Towards Corporate Accountability for Human Rights Violations in the Global South?

The adoption of the French Duty of Vigilance law has been celebrated as a milestone for advancing the transnational business and human rights regime. The law can contribute to harden corporate accountability by challenging the “separation principle” of transnational companies and by obligating companies to report on their duty of vigilance. However, the question of whether the law actually contributes to human rights and environmental protection along global supply chains requires empirically grounded research that connects processes in home and host state countries. This paper contributes to such a new research agenda by linking political ecology literature and empirical insights from the Global South to research on due diligence regulations. With reference to field research data on contestations between the oil and gas company Total E&P and indigenous communities in Bolivia, I argue that the burden of proof and contestations over valid knowledge represent major obstacles when trying to establish legal liability.

A Topographical Approach to Accountability for Human Rights Violations in Migration Control

This Article charts a “topographical” approach to accountability in migration control, whereby the site of a violation is perceived from a bird’s-eye view and accountability pursued through diverse legal regimes and via a broadened geographic lens. Drawing on scholarship on legal geography, legal black holes, and strategic litigation, we argue that accountability structures may usefully be approached topographically. Rather than advocating for accountability in regard to particular regimes or jurisdictions, the topographical approach offers a general framework for mapping and exploring the full grid of potential accountability mechanisms.

A Topographical Approach to Accountability for Human Rights Violations in Migration Control

AbstractThis Article develops what we call a “topographical approach” to accountability in migration control. Drawing on different strands of scholarship, including legal geography, “legal black holes,” and work on strategic litigation, we approach accountability by perceiving the site of a violation from a bird's-eye view and mapping different accountability structures across diverse legal regimes and via a broadened geographic lens. Rather than advocating for accountability in regard to particular regimes or jurisdictions, we argue that multi-pronged approaches are likely to remain the best starting point for ensuring accountability for human rights violations in the context of current migration control practices. The topographical approach thus offers a general framework for identifying existing blind spots, critically assessing existing trajectories, as well as exploring the wider grid of potential accountability mechanisms.

Border Justice: Migration and Accountability for Human Rights Violations

AbstractThis introductory Article sets out the premise of the Special Issue, the entrenched and pervasive nature of human rights violations in the context of migration control and the apparent lack of accountability for such violations. It sets out features of contemporary migration control practices and their legal governance that contribute to this phenomenon, namely the exceptional treatment of migration in international law; the limited scope of international refugee law; and the pervasive use of externalized, delegated migration controls, in particular by the EU and its Member States. The roots of the current condition are traced back to the containment practices that emerged at the end of the Cold War, with the 2015 “crisis” framed both as an illustration of the failures of containment, and a source of further stasis. Following an overview of the contributions that make up the Special Issue, this Article identifies five emergent themes, and suggests further lines of inquiry. These are: the promise and limits of strategic human rights limitations; the role of both international criminal law, and domestic (and regional) tort law in securing accountability; the turn to positive obligations to challenge entrenched features of containment; and the role of direct action in support of and solidarity with those challenging migration controls most directly, refugees and migrants themselves. Rather than offering panaceas, the Article concludes with the identification of further new challenges, notably the role of new technologies in further dissipating lines of accountability for decisions to exclude.

Accountability for human rights violations in Syria: reasons for hope

ABSTRACTAgainst the background of ongoing brutal violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in Syria, and the Security Council’s failure to refer the situation there to the International Criminal Court, this paper identifies some bright spots on the horizon in relation to pursuing accountability for serious human rights violations. In particular, it focuses on the General Assembly’s creation of the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism for Syria and the increased willingness of third-party States to embark on prosecutions of persons for international crimes using universal jurisdiction. In addition to outlining the nature of these responses and their constitutive legal frameworks, this paper highlights the potential contribution of each response, along with key limitations to and challenges in responding to victims’ rights to truth, justice and reparations. It also queries Australia’s readiness to investigate and prosecute violations that have taken place in Syria and so fully contribute to the rendering of justice.

Accountability for Human Rights Violations in Cambodia: Mapping the Indirect Effects of Transitional Justice Mechanisms

When studying accountability for human rights violations in Cambodia, it is crucial to understand the role human rights non-governmental organisations (ngos) can play in holding duty-bearers accountable. This article consists of two parts. The first traces how some prominent Cambodian ngos use the language of human rights and which issues they prioritise. The analysis shows that issues related to civil and political rights dominate their discourse, while there is remarkably little attention to issues relating to economic, social and cultural rights. This prioritisation is not rooted in popular priorities, nor can it be adequately explained by referring to mainstream theories of donor influence or professionalised elites. To better understand where these priorities come from, the second part of the article examines the Cambodian transitional justice process. This analysis shows a significant overlap between the priorities of the selected ngos and those of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (eccc). It is therefore argued that transitional justice mechanisms, like the eccc, may have an agenda-setting power far beyond what is commonly assumed. In this specific case, this influence raises questions about accountability for past and on-going violations of economic, social and cultural rights.

Guarding the guards: Pluralist accountability for human rights violations by international organisations

AbstractHuman rights violations committed by international organisations (IOs) have raised demands that IOs should be held accountable for their decisions, policies, and actions. However, traditional forms of accountability have often failed in the context of global governance. This article introduces pluralist accountability as a form of accountability whereby third parties hold IOs and their implementing partners accountable for human rights violations. In pluralist accountability, third parties set the standards for IOs’ actions in relation to human rights, review their behaviour and impose normative or material sanctions in case of misbehaviour. The article further reveals two conditions that foster the development of pluralist accountability, namely the competition among third parties and the degree of vulnerability of the implementing actors or the mandating authority with regard to human rights demands. This argument is illustrated with empirical insights from peace operations in Bosnia and Kosovo, which were accused of human trafficking and the violation of the rights of detainees.

Killing Corporations to Save Humans: How Corporate Personhood, Human Rights, and the Corporate Death Penalty Intersect

There is a growing sense of frustration among certain groups that the attribution of rights and responsibilities to corporations is evolving in a manner contrary to the best interests of natural persons. In the United States Supreme Court, for example, we have recently seen an expansion of corporate free speech rights (Citizens United, 2010) and religious free exercise rights (Hobby Lobby, 2014), while arguments for holding corporate actors accountable for complicity in human rights violations have been rejected (Kiobel, 2013; Jesner, 2018). One of the primary justifications for expanding corporate rights is the belief that corporate rights should essentially track the rights of the natural persons who own or manage them, which is a position often equated with the aggregate or real entity theory of corporate personhood. Meanwhile, one of the justifications for limiting corporate responsibility is a feared loss of the economic benefits that corporate status bestows on society as a whole in the form of job creation, innovation, etc. This fear of lost productivity is also prominent in discussions surrounding the “corporate death penalty.” This book chapter, forthcoming in The Hostile Takeover (U. of Toronto Press), will argue that the corporate death penalty and corporate personhood are connected in the context of corporate accountability for human rights violations because the fear of the negative consequences of corporate accountability embodied in the corporate death penalty strengthens arguments in favor of corporate personhood theories that support expanding corporate rights, while those same corporate personhood theories support limiting corporate accountability, including accountability via the corporate death penalty. Finally, a number of arguments that challenge both the pro-rights corporate personality theories and the anti-accountability fears triggered by threats of a corporate death penalty will be discussed, thus providing a reasonable starting point for activists seeking greater corporate accountability for human rights violations to challenge the current trend, at least as perceived by some, towards greater corporate rights and less corporate accountability.

Perdagangan Internasional dan HAM: Relasinya dengan Sustainable Development

Industrialization and export and import activities between countries around the world in this era of globalization. the issue of sustainable development in which the trade also related with physical and environmental aspects, but also considers the benefits and security of the man himself. Many facts encountered that some cases were found, the non-compliance of transnational corporations to pay attention to the principles of human rights fulfillment. Legal issues raised: (1) provisions on international trade, environment, and human rights. (2) case analysis related to international trade, environment and human rights. The research method used statue approach, conceptual approach, and case approach. Research results: (1) Countries are expected an important role in securing how the effects of human rights violations resulting from international trade activities can be minimized in such a way through the principles to protect, and respect for the human rights of citizens. Thus, the public benefits from many international trade activities conducted by the state. as well as sustainable development is also realized through the principle of remedy for transnational corporations found to have done environmental damage and accompanied by human rights violations in its business activities. (2) In the cases presented, it has proved that transnational corporations directly commit human rights violations and environmental destruction, to threats to the state sovereignty process. This issue needs to be addressed in the enforcement of international legal mechanisms. In the extraterritorial court's decision, it is difficult for plaintiffs who are victims of justice and accountability for human rights violations and environmental damage.

Human Rights Trials in an Era of Democratic Stagnation: The Case of Turkey

Domestic human rights trials are often conceptualized within the context of transition toward democracy. Yet, a recent cascade of trials in Turkey defies this argument. Between 2008 and 2015, Turkish courts oversaw fifteen trials examining individual criminal accountability for human rights violations carried out by the Turkish military during the conflict with the PKK in the 1990s. The cascade of trials has emerged and remained ongoing while the Turkish regime has become steadily more authoritarian. This article explains the emergence of these trials by the redistribution of power among elite actors, which created a window of opportunity allowing for ongoing legal mobilization to result in prosecutions. Drawing on original data from interviews conducted in Turkey between 2014–2015, this study demonstrates the importance of power redistribution for human rights during periods of democratic stagnation, while emphasizing the ability of trials to contribute to the contestation of hegemonic narratives.

Fighting Against Impunity: the Federal Prosecution Service and the Gomes Lund Case

Abstract Recently, the Federal Prosecution Service has embraced the agenda of individual criminal accountability for human rights violations committed by the military dictatorship. This article aims to reconstruct such process of institutional change, analyzing the effects of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ ruling on the Gomes Lund case, and how it has favored a more progressive group of pro-compliance prosecutors.

The Role of Non-Governmental Organizations in the Business and Human Rights Treaty Negotiations

AbstractIn June 2014, the UN Human Rights Council established an intergovernmental working group to elaborate a treaty on business and human rights. In July 2015, the working group held its first session launching the negotiations process—the culmination of a global movement of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that over the last four decades have called for greater corporate accountability for human rights violations. The advocacy activities of the Treaty Alliance, an alliance of NGOs that supports the development of the treaty, were pivotal to the tabling of the resolution establishing the working group. These organizations now have the opportunity to engage with the negotiations process, both formally and informally, through consultations, advocacy, and lobbying. This article considers the impact NGOs may have in the drafting negotiations of the proposed treaty. It identifies several lobbying and advocacy strategies that were successful in previous international law-making processes and discusses the extent to which they could be applied to the current negotiations. It presents the benefits of an NGO coalition, of formal and informal lobbying strategies, and of the development of a common NGOs and friendly states framework. It analyses the reasons for Western states’ opposition and suggests lobbying strategies that may overcome it. Recognizing the unique subject matter of this treaty, it also focuses on lobbying corporate actors, and explores the complementarity between the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the treaty and the need for NGOs to support both. The article concludes on the necessity to compromise on essential points if a treaty is ever to emerge.